http://www.jsoftware.com/pipermail/general/2005-December/026024.html



----- Original Message -----
From: Tracy Harms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 12:15
Subject: [Jchat] Iverson notations and infinite sets
To: [email protected]

> John Randall wrote, in the Programming forum:
>  
> > I think the author of the Wikipedia article is trying to get 
> at this,
> > so you would accept 1+1=2 (mod 12) but not 9+4=1 (mod 
> 12).  In my
> > opinion, this fixates on the distinguished representatives rather
> > than the equivalence classes, and if you do that, you will go wrong
> > somewhere else.
> 
> Thank you for this assessment of that flawed Wikipedia paragraph.
>  
> Because equivalence classes are infinite sets, my curiosity is piqued:
> How should Iverson notation be applied when dealing with 
> infinite sets?
> 
> It seems that for this use we must move to statements that would 
> not be
> valid under the requirements of executability that J and APL entail.
> Yet, it would be nice to be able to refer to things like these
> equivalence classes, integers, rational numbers, real numbers, 
> and the
> complex plane within a near-J notational structure.
>  
> I've put this to the Chat forum because it departs from J 
> proper, but if
> the moderators think it is a better fit for the Programming 
> forum we can
> move it back there.
>  
> Another area where I'm not entirely sure how to apply J are statements
> of formal logic such as "for all" and "there exists" (inverted 
> capitalsA and E, respectively.)
> 
> In general, I wish to explore a return to the roots of J.  The
> abstraction of tacit notation is itself a triumph along those 
> lines; the
> way it removes specification of particulars allows us to refer 
> strictlyto the functions. The arguments could in many cases be 
> infinite sets,
> setting aside the needs of implementation.  The limit power 
> (^:_) also
> provides something along these lines.
>  
> As an example of where my curiosity has wandered, I've not been 
> able to
> decide whether (i: _j_) naturally denotes the Rationals, or only a
> subset of them. (If "_" were taken as a value, which it must not 
> be, it
> would denote the Integers.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to